Mismatched glenoid, humeral implant manufacturers may not affect outcomes of RSA
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
Key takeaways:
- Reverse shoulder arthroplasty with glenoid and humeral implants from different manufacturers may not negatively affect outcomes.
- Results were similar vs. patients with implants from the same manufacturer.
Published results showed patients who underwent reverse shoulder arthroplasty with glenoid and humeral components from different manufacturers had similar 2-year outcomes compared with patients who had implants from the same manufacturer.
Austin F. Smith, MD, orthopedic shoulder and hip surgeon at OrthoArizona, and colleagues performed a retrospective cohort comparison of prospectively collected data from 191 patients who underwent primary RSA through a deltopectoral approach performed by one surgeon between January 2016 and June 2020 and had complete 2-year follow-up.
Among the cohort, 39 patients received mismatched glenoid and humeral implants from different manufacturers, while 152 patients received matching glenoid and humeral implants from the same manufacturer.
According to the study, implants for patients in the mismatched cohort consisted of the Flex Shoulder System (Stryker), the Medacta Shoulder System (Medacta) or the Univers Revers Total Shoulder System (Arthrex). Implants for patients in the matched cohort included the same options plus the Humelock Reversed (FX Shoulder Solutions).
Outcome measures included VAS, subjective shoulder value, Constant and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores.
At 2 years, Smith and colleagues found outcome scores were similar between the mismatched and matched cohorts for VAS (P = .716), subjective shoulder value (P = .125), Constant (P = .607) and ASES (P = .673) scores. They also found no significant differences in complication rates between the cohorts.
“The results may provide valuable information for orthopedic surgeons when selecting the appropriate implant components for RSA and help guide clinical decision-making for better patient outcomes,” Smith and colleagues wrote in the study. “It appears reasonable to have manufacturer mismatch when appropriate matching of implant material and curvature at a given diameter is used.”
Collapse
Read more about
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts